The human rights NGO points out that no written decision has been served on the people concerned and denounces denial of rights.
Amnesty International (AI) described Thursday as “arbitrary” and “illegal” the travel bans outside Tunisia imposed on several personalities since the coup by Tunisian President Kaïs Saïed, which has monopolized all powers since July 25.
The human rights organization claims to have identified since that date at least fifty cases of travel bans targeting judges, civil servants, businessmen, and a parliamentarian. “The total number is probably much higher,” Amnesty added in a statement.
Mr. Saïed, elected president in 2019, invoked the Constitution to grant himself full powers, dismiss the head of government and suspend Parliament for an initial period of thirty days, before announcing Monday evening the sine die continuation of these measures.
Since this coup, arrests, travel bans and house arrest have targeted magistrates, deputies, and businessmen, as part of an anti-corruption “purge” promised by Mr. Saïed, now arousing fears of a decline in freedoms in Tunisia.
“The indefinite suspension of Parliament by President Kais Saied cannot justify the violation of rights and freedoms in the country or undermine the justice system,” said Heba Morayef, Amnesty International director for the Middle East and Africa North.
Verbal restriction
“The Tunisian authorities have imposed illegal and arbitrary travel bans on people in recent weeks without justification and in the absence of any judicial decision, in flagrant violation of their right to freedom of movement”, added Morayef, quoted in the press release. “Even in exceptional circumstances, a person should be able to see and challenge the evidence on which a travel ban is based,” she added.
“Freedom of movement is a constitutional right that I am committed to guaranteeing”, however, assured President Saïed last week. “But some people will have to answer to justice before they can travel,” he warned.
However, the examination of the fifty cases identified by AI “shows that those banned from travel had no real trial or judicial investigation opened against them” and that they were not informed of the ban on travel. travel only verbally by airport security officers.
“This lack of a written decision to restrict their freedom of movement compromises their ability to appeal the ban”, according to AI.
